Tweet
There are so many factors to consider in this debate
One has to look at so many things. For example, is the average size of a human being larger because the 3rd world is getting better nutrition? That would make size average out, not necessarily affect a single sport so much.
Then we have different size elements in reality versus what people perceive. Stereotypes are great for this argument! Next time you see your local public high school for special academic honors, full of Asian kids, as an icebreaker you might say to one of them..."You know why there are so many Asian kids like you here? Because your country of origin has many bad students!" This could start a nice conversation!
Africa, India and China, have tremendous diversity for different reasons perhaps.... China and India JUST have more people! You will find that more geniuses come out of Brooklyn New York than Des Moines for the same reason. You increase the chance for a pearl when you have more oysters around...A by product of which is a lot of oysters with no pearl, that go great with a Mignon sauce!
Africa actually has tremendous genetic diversity. For every Wilt the stilt you have people who are short, squat and would trade a basketball for a nice melon to prepare (I know at this point I would prefer the melon as well, unless it is one of those fab ABA basketballs!).
Also we have to look realistically at what we see in boxing. One would expect that the major change would be for the heavy weights. But look carefully at how many extra big fighters actually dominate. I personally would not rule out that fighters are deciding to come in heavier and with more muscle, and that it is not a predisposition. Fighters trained to be lean and quick...Marciano walked around at around 220 but was religious about being under 200 on fight night. He did things like chew meat and not swallow it, etc. Fighters also did a lot of roadwork.
Just look at the last 20 years or so, and who actually were the dominant heavy weights. People mistake a trend for a pattern often...So we have the Klitskos, Lewis and Fury. But even Wilder and Ruiz are not bigger men. As far as Joshua, hard to say...Again he comes in muscled and it is quite possible a trainer back in the day when boxers were expected to do more things in the ring, would demand that he lighten up. Joshua might come in at around 220-240 at the highest...Marciano could fight at 220 and if he had lifted weights could have bulked up to a greater size as well.
My point is to distinguish a strategy from a change that occured irrespective of any strategy involved. Speaking of which it may not have occured to people that it was viable to put on a coat of muscle. Trainers today, while there are not as many who are totally boxing geniuses, do know about how to build the body...
Lets take a situation like when Jack Johnson was going to fight Jess Willard. Lets say a trainer like Macke Shillstone (sp?) who trained HOpkins and other fighters to develop incredible physical aility was around and approached by Johnson. My question is: Could he have taken Jack and put on twenty pounds of muscle on him? Making Johnson around 215-225 for that fight? We will never know but I think with enough time he could have.
Finally we have Big versus BIG and this has come up a lot lately in this section. Weight is one aspect of size. measures like Bone density, the measure of the upper body versus the lower, etc all figure into weight that can be categorized as "useful" or not. Deontay Wilder and Bob Fitzimmons are both big from the waist up and had/have small legs. Conventional wisdom would tell us that this size difference would affect the punch of each man, yet both were devistating punchers. Legs ca be small and very strong...the weight of their legs would make both of them lighter as compared to if they had bigger legs.
When we get to a heavyweight like Vlad, Tyson Fury, Lewis they are obviously very big. but it can be argued that in no case did these fighters establish that size made them dominant. Lewis lost to heavyweights that were average sized, Vlad never dominated other great fighters and Fury is making his bones as we speak. Ruiz is not a big heavy weight and has exceptional weight because of fat. When he comes in to fight Joshua he will probably be at a diminished weight from 265.
Looking at other big heavyweights we would find guys who are not outstanding punchers, and who often have stamina issues, vis a vis, all these guys look beatable. King Kong is another heavy weight that is not particularly large, but chooses to come into fight heavy.
My point is that there is no actions in the division suggesting that a class of bigger fighters has become dominant.
Regarding the "Tunney" quote, it is in the thread on materials Tunney wrote and in it he was quoted as saying the size for a good heavyweight is 190 pounds. Tunney felt this was all the weight that was necessary. No, I do not agree, this is a little low for me! lol. I would put it at around 220.
One has to look at so many things. For example, is the average size of a human being larger because the 3rd world is getting better nutrition? That would make size average out, not necessarily affect a single sport so much.
Then we have different size elements in reality versus what people perceive. Stereotypes are great for this argument! Next time you see your local public high school for special academic honors, full of Asian kids, as an icebreaker you might say to one of them..."You know why there are so many Asian kids like you here? Because your country of origin has many bad students!" This could start a nice conversation!
Africa, India and China, have tremendous diversity for different reasons perhaps.... China and India JUST have more people! You will find that more geniuses come out of Brooklyn New York than Des Moines for the same reason. You increase the chance for a pearl when you have more oysters around...A by product of which is a lot of oysters with no pearl, that go great with a Mignon sauce!
Africa actually has tremendous genetic diversity. For every Wilt the stilt you have people who are short, squat and would trade a basketball for a nice melon to prepare (I know at this point I would prefer the melon as well, unless it is one of those fab ABA basketballs!).
Also we have to look realistically at what we see in boxing. One would expect that the major change would be for the heavy weights. But look carefully at how many extra big fighters actually dominate. I personally would not rule out that fighters are deciding to come in heavier and with more muscle, and that it is not a predisposition. Fighters trained to be lean and quick...Marciano walked around at around 220 but was religious about being under 200 on fight night. He did things like chew meat and not swallow it, etc. Fighters also did a lot of roadwork.
Just look at the last 20 years or so, and who actually were the dominant heavy weights. People mistake a trend for a pattern often...So we have the Klitskos, Lewis and Fury. But even Wilder and Ruiz are not bigger men. As far as Joshua, hard to say...Again he comes in muscled and it is quite possible a trainer back in the day when boxers were expected to do more things in the ring, would demand that he lighten up. Joshua might come in at around 220-240 at the highest...Marciano could fight at 220 and if he had lifted weights could have bulked up to a greater size as well.
My point is to distinguish a strategy from a change that occured irrespective of any strategy involved. Speaking of which it may not have occured to people that it was viable to put on a coat of muscle. Trainers today, while there are not as many who are totally boxing geniuses, do know about how to build the body...
Lets take a situation like when Jack Johnson was going to fight Jess Willard. Lets say a trainer like Macke Shillstone (sp?) who trained HOpkins and other fighters to develop incredible physical aility was around and approached by Johnson. My question is: Could he have taken Jack and put on twenty pounds of muscle on him? Making Johnson around 215-225 for that fight? We will never know but I think with enough time he could have.
Finally we have Big versus BIG and this has come up a lot lately in this section. Weight is one aspect of size. measures like Bone density, the measure of the upper body versus the lower, etc all figure into weight that can be categorized as "useful" or not. Deontay Wilder and Bob Fitzimmons are both big from the waist up and had/have small legs. Conventional wisdom would tell us that this size difference would affect the punch of each man, yet both were devistating punchers. Legs ca be small and very strong...the weight of their legs would make both of them lighter as compared to if they had bigger legs.
When we get to a heavyweight like Vlad, Tyson Fury, Lewis they are obviously very big. but it can be argued that in no case did these fighters establish that size made them dominant. Lewis lost to heavyweights that were average sized, Vlad never dominated other great fighters and Fury is making his bones as we speak. Ruiz is not a big heavy weight and has exceptional weight because of fat. When he comes in to fight Joshua he will probably be at a diminished weight from 265.
Looking at other big heavyweights we would find guys who are not outstanding punchers, and who often have stamina issues, vis a vis, all these guys look beatable. King Kong is another heavy weight that is not particularly large, but chooses to come into fight heavy.
My point is that there is no actions in the division suggesting that a class of bigger fighters has become dominant.
Regarding the "Tunney" quote, it is in the thread on materials Tunney wrote and in it he was quoted as saying the size for a good heavyweight is 190 pounds. Tunney felt this was all the weight that was necessary. No, I do not agree, this is a little low for me! lol. I would put it at around 220.
Comment